Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
14 Posts

The Great War» Forums » General

Subject: Early War Expansion rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
D B
msg tools
Any chance we will see early war figures, 1914-1915 as an expansion, along with the Russians, Austro-Hungarians, Serbians and Turk? Just to make The Great War as complete as possible.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark McG
Australia
Penshurst
NSW
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I believe the expansion is to be called Warhorse, and I've seen some brief discussion of the planned dates, but can't find them now.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Duke
United States
Wynne
Arkansas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've seen references to it also, but think it very likely that this will be queued up behind several other nationalities. Including probably pretty soon, the Americans. I realize folks can make a case for US troops being of lessor importance to the war, but in a business, it make sense to go where the customers are. 1/3 of the French expansion supporters were US and only 25% were British and 10% French). PSC was called on to include the FT-17 tank in the French expansion and declined. It might make sense to include it with US troops, since they used a lot of them.

When you think about it, the Russian battles were largely of the 'early war' style for much of the action. That might be a good place to bring in Russians and "early war" Germans, and then take it from there.

What I can't guess at is how much tweaking the system might need for early war action.

Mark, I know you can't find the dates in the discussion but do you recall 'sequence?"
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark McG
Australia
Penshurst
NSW
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
My recollection is Russians, then Warhorse.

Then the FT-17s and the US expansion was discussed in the Kickstarter campaign
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1992455033/richard-borg...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark McG
Australia
Penshurst
NSW
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
bit of a quick search and I found the mention I recollected

https://boardgamegeek.com/article/27504709#27504709

there may be others
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark McG
Australia
Penshurst
NSW
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
a quick search and I found the mention I recollected

https://boardgamegeek.com/article/27504709#27504709

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryan Heck @aqualithmedia
United States
Excelsior
Minnesota
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Great to hear about the American Army Expansion after the War horse one. Will have to strategise for my future purchases.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Janos Balogh
Hungary
Mosonmagyarovar
Gyor-Moson-Sopron
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Slipstream wrote:
Great to hear about the American Army Expansion after the War horse one. Will have to strategies for my future purchases.


All quiet on the next expansion front?

American expansion + Renault FT-17, would be profitable, but still the same trench warfare.

I believe a Warhorse expansion early British vs Germans could give us something different, plus the Russians vs Germans at Tannenberg 1914 would be the next step. Producing the tank models are slow down the productions, also we have plenty now. Lets break the stereotype make something non trench. Also do a smaller Kick starter this one take almost a year to finish, also breakthrough and epic scenarios would make the gaming experience better. I supported all 3 project, now I have enough figures for bigger maps, 16 dice which is enough for 4 player, I would like to use this lot of "hardware".

What You think?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
StevenE Smooth Sailing...
United States
Torrance
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
janos900 wrote:
Slipstream wrote:
Great to hear about the American Army Expansion after the War horse one. Will have to strategies for my future purchases.


All quiet on the next expansion front?

American expansion + Renault FT-17, would be profitable, but still the same trench warfare.

I believe a Warhorse expansion early British vs Germans could give us something different, plus the Russians vs Germans at Tannenberg 1914 would be the next step. Producing the tank models are slow down the productions, also we have plenty now. Lets break the stereotype make something non trench. Also do a smaller Kick starter this one take almost a year to finish, also breakthrough and epic scenarios would make the gaming experience better. I supported all 3 project, now I have enough figures for bigger maps, 16 dice which is enough for 4 player, I would like to use this lot of "hardware".

What You think?


If I remember the conversation correctly... US expansion is dependent on how well the French expansion sells.

RB has all the WWI armies planned... how they are presented/published will be up to PSC
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthew Fedel
United States
Winston-Salem
North Carolina
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'd think a Gallipoli Campaign or expansion would be great for TGW. I heard that Richard and team have the content. I think it would be really interesting in this system.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark McG
Australia
Penshurst
NSW
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Gallipoli would be quite hard in my view. Something no C&C game has handled very well is steep mountains, and aside from cliffs in BattleLore and perhaps Ravines in Samurai Battles, C&C terrain has generally been quite level.

One exception is the Rolica 2 scenario in CCN, which uses impassable terrain to create gullies, and possibly this could be an option, but that scenario is exceptionally tough (particularly as the 2nd scenario of the Base game!).

Mind you the Italian Front has the same issues, so maybe some experimentation there might be useful.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michal K
Poland
Otwock
Mazowieckie
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Fedelis wrote:
I'd think a Gallipoli Campaign or expansion would be great for TGW. I heard that Richard and team have the content. I think it would be really interesting in this system.


Indeed, that would give a lot of flavor - and possibility to depict also Palestinian front (having Ottomans minis).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Janos Balogh
Hungary
Mosonmagyarovar
Gyor-Moson-Sopron
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Minedog3 wrote:
Gallipoli would be quite hard in my view. Something no C&C game has handled very well is steep mountains, and aside from cliffs in BattleLore and perhaps Ravines in Samurai Battles, C&C terrain has generally been quite level.

One exception is the Rolica 2 scenario in CCN, which uses impassable terrain to create gullies, and possibly this could be an option, but that scenario is exceptionally tough (particularly as the 2nd scenario of the Base game!).

Mind you the Italian Front has the same issues, so maybe some experimentation there might be useful.


I think Memoir44 deal with these broblems very well, so just need to adapt the rules. I am thinking about to make Italian front scenarios (Just back from Caporetto, Trieste and Doberdo ). Need at least 3 levels of hills and mountains (Have wooden hexes about 1cm high). I also have 15mm Peter Pig figures for the Austrian army. With the new special figures I have a good base to re-create those battles in a colorful way. That is why I support this game, offers You an enjoyable game play for the Italian front.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark McG
Australia
Penshurst
NSW
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I also thought on this today;

Peaks & Rugged Hills

Peaks represent taller terrain than normal Hills, and are treated as a Hill on a Hill for most purposes

Setup
- Place a Hill tile with extra terrain tiles (or some other tile raiser) such that the Peak is visibly higher than normal hills. A Peak tile could be created instead (if someone has art skills).
Movement
- Units may move from a normal Hill to a Peak and vice versa
- Units may not move from other terrain onto a Peak (and vice versa). Treat as a Cliff.
- Units may move from Peak to Peak at movement cost of Hills.
Line of Sight
- Units on Peaks can ignore adjacent blocking terrain other than Peaks for the purposes of determining LOS
- Units on Peaks treat Hills and other Peaks as plateau
- Peaks block LOS for units on Hills and other terrain.
Battle
- Units on Peaks are treated as being on Hills for Battle, including being treated as up hill from Hill terrain.
- Artillery on Peaks can fire 1 dice at one hex beyond their normal range (allowing for other factors such as LOS). This does not combine with any Hill effects.


Rugged Hills

When a scenario specifies Rugged Hills, the standard Hill rules and Peaks are modified in the following manner.
- Only Battlefield Soldier units may move onto Rugged Hills and must Stop and No Battle.
ALTERNATIVELY
- It costs 2 moves to enter a Hill hex, OR a unit can use 1 movement to enter, but must roll 1 die and will remove 1 figure if a Deadly Die is rolled.
- Units entering Rugged hills must Stop and No Battle.
- Hills block LOS across them, including plateau effect.
- Peaks are treated as Hills for entry.
- Units on Peaks can ignore adjacent Hill hexes for LOS, but all other Hills are treated a blocking LOS.
- Tanks may not enter Rugged Hills
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.